Should the global warming Q&A be moved to the "Society & Culture > Mythology & Folklore" section of YA?

Question

With the lack of any evidence this only makes sense.

Answer 1

The evidence is there, and it is substantive.  You simply refuse to review the evidence with an open mind.

But you can hang out in the mythology section if you'd like.  Folks there don't bicker and sling insults nearly as often as they seem to do here.

Answer 2

No, but I think you should ask questions in "Jokes and Riddles" in future. Claiming a lack of evidence for global warming was a joke, right?

Only someone with little or no scientific education would make the claims that you are making. You can thumb me down all you want, it doesn't make me less right or you less ignorant.

The truth hurts, doesn't it?

Answer 3

Mikira

You might want to do a little more research, catalytic converters change toxic substances like carbon monoxide by converting it to carbon dioxide the same happens with unburnt fuel, also converted to Co2.

And while modern makers are trying to reduce Co2 emissions the overall number of cars in the world is ~600,000,000 this number is set to double in the next 30 years an average small car like the Peugeot 304 produces ~120-140g/km the average would be quite a bit higher, but even 120g multiplied by 600 million is a huge amount of Co2 going into the Earths closed atmosphere.

Its (based on 120g/km)72 million tons for every kilometer the worlds car travel

Answer 4

I think under the Mythology or Religion section would be best.

I've read all the Q&A on global warming and no one has yet to show proof that humans cause it.  99% of scientists now say that there's absolutely no proof humans cause any type of climate change.

So the "believers" who I like to call "deniers of truth" should either give us proof that humans cause climate change or just admit that it's a religion and we should respect it and not question their beliefs.

That being said, maybe Religion is the best section after all.

Answer 5

No it shouldn't

Answer 6

Lack of evidence? Have you even TRIED to research this topic.  The only theory lacking evidence is the one that says there is no global warming (due to human factors).

We burn 19 million barrels of oil a day in the country, where exactly do you thing the CO2 goes?  Seriously, what is happening to those millions of tons of carbon we are putting into the athmosphere day and night?

Would be happy to read an reputable report or statistics on the subject. Please provide a link.

Answer 7

Dr jellos answers are really starting to look like he just wants the points and can't actually be bothered with the question.

I did find the link below and found the heading interesting as this is a recurring theme for deniers to use against those who think global warming is happening, the more I read in the link the more "UFOISM viewpoint" sounded exactly like the questions posted here by deniers.

My belief in global warming is based on the work of many scientists and the scientific method based on observation and data collected over ~30 years and related data that covers periods of 100s 1000s and 100,000s of years.

Including the The temp record, rising Co2 levels, declining arctic ice

When viewed as a total I find it very convincing while the dribble posted here by deniers ranges from blogs to insults to just plain lies I find nothing in their arguments even slightly believable ranging from the laughable "Co2 isn't a greenhouse gas" to the ridiculous "the UN are trying take over the world" If anything should be in the Mythology section it is most of the denier BS

Answer 8

U need a lie section,propagated by Gore..

Answer 9

Yes. maybe they could start a fiction/propaganda section.

Answer 10

Yes - People who believe in global warming also are more likely to believe in UFO's.  There is no proof of either, but they have to be right because this is what they believe.

Answer 11

Yes or the religion section

Answer 12

No, global warming, cooling, climate change are not fictitious.  I side with the skeptics on the issue, however I disagree with the premise of your question.

Dr. Blob

I see where your coming from,  however I can say the the opposite is true where I live.  This past winter was earlier and colder then the norm, this spring has been cooler then usual.

Answer 13

Yes that's where it belonged in the first place.

Edit: The two of you that believe this is real and caused by man. Tell us the evidence that YOU OBSERVED. Yes, that's the key. All of you just believe what others are telling you without looking for your own evidence to substantiate all these false claims. Oh and don't just point to car exhaust and factory smoke stakes, since cars have catalytic converters on them and don't give out as many so called harmful gases as people believe they do when driven in wide open spaces. And we've been cleaning factory emissions for years and will continue to do so with or without this false scare tactic.

Answer 14

Ok, here is some evidence I personally observed.

I've been caring for a property for 35 years.  Lots of trees, have to clean up the leaves.  If you let them lay too long it kills the grass.  If you don't get them up in time it can snow and then you're stuck until spring.  The rule was always this, clean them up as you go, but you have to wait till the leaves are all down to clean up the last bit.  The leaf fall goes in stages.  The 2nd to last stage is when 90% are down, with some stubborn bits that cling on.  Then a week or two later a rain or wind storm brings the last bit down and the trees are totally bare for the winter.  

The 90% mark was always by the 2nd week of November.  This was very convenient for me because that left the Thanksgiving weekend to finish the job.

The last couple of years something has changed.  It changed by two weeks.  Now, the 90% mark is the end of November and the 100% mark is the 2nd week of December.

It's been very obvious, very clear change.  There were even several questions here last Fall from people with comments like "Doesn't Fall seem to be coming later this year?"

Of course, this isn't proof.  But it aligns nicely with the accepted theory of AGW.  

Of course, you all will say this is natural and not caused by man.  But you have no alternate theory.

Therefore, according to your thinking, it is anthropogenic climate change denial that should have it's own category in the myth section.

Well, at least I guess the snow will come later so it's a wash. (sarcasm).

edit:

Mark,

It's interesting to me that these changes seem to be occuring now with more frequency and amplitude; although the direction of change can be positive or negative and this really throws some people.  But these varying effects are predicted in the models. Here is my favorite statement on the issue:

“The concentrations of greenhouse gases produced by man has risen significantly during the historical record and it is absolutely known (by reproducible, verifiable lab experiments on the physical properties of these gases) that these gases cause warming by absorbing the outgoing radiation from the earth. The skeptics have not produced any evidence that this rise in the greenhouse gas concentrations occurred by some natural process and they have also failed to explain how all the industrial emissions could have been absorbed by some natural process during the recent historical period.  There is no way to explain the observed greenhouse gas concentrations without human interference, and there is no credible way to claim that the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations has not caused a warming of the Earth’s surface. While there are other natural processes at work and while the climate system is highly complex, trying to discount the role of human involvement in recent climate change is speculation and opinion, not science.” - Asher Siebert.  

Regards, Blob

edit2:

"I've read all the Q&A on global warming and no one has yet to show proof that humans cause it. 99% of scientists now say that there's absolutely no proof humans cause any type of climate change."

We can safely ignore all further posts from this individual.